Adequacy front page
Stories Diaries Polls Users
Google

Web Adequacy.org
Home About Topics Rejects Abortions
This is an archive site only. It is no longer maintained. You can not post comments. You can not make an account. Your email will not be read. Please read this page if you have questions.
Poll
What's the worst thing about geeks?
The smell. 45%
The attitude. 54%

Votes: 74

 Writing Satire For A Technical Audience

 Author:  Topic:  Posted:
Feb 01, 2002
 Comments:
It's easy to reach the conclusion that the techies who infest the various gaming, hardware and Lunix advocacy sites are sad, humorless geeks who simply don't appreciate satire. Nothing could be further from the truth. Geeks love satire; it's just that they lack the critical faculties to recognize it. Subtlety may be lost on these people, but that doesn't mean you can't have a rewarding experience writing comedic and/or satirical pieces about technical subjects. Adequacy.org is here to show you how.
internet_idiocy

More stories about Internet Idiocy
Milosevic Goes Free, Thanks to Godwin's Law!
The Online Social World: Internet Dating
Wil Wheaton Moves Beyond Wesley To Internet Stardom
Is Your Son a Computer Hacker?
Internet Licenses: An Idea Whose Time Has Come?
Death Threats on Groups.Google.Com
Adequacy.Org Presents the Commonsense Crossword
Google Needs a Winston Smith
On criminal language and the word `hacker'
Avatars and the Telecommunications Revolution
Keeping the terrorists off the net
The Internet, Pornography, and Masturbation are destroying college students

More stories by
Peter Johnson

Solving Teen Pregnancy
The Law Fought The Law And Nobody Won
Winning The Battle Against Pornography
The Science of Poetry
A Time For Patriots
Victoria, BC: Potemkin Village of the Frozen North
The Proselytizing Atheist
Boom City, USA

Know Your Audience.

Understanding your audience is, of course, critical regardless of who that audience is. As many an aspiring stand-up comic has discovered to his cost, jokes about domestic violence don't play well to a mixed audience. Women don't find them funny and men know better than to laugh at them in front of their wives and sweethearts. On the other hand, such jokes are fine when addressing a geek audience via the web since precious few of them have girlfriends and even if they do, web-surfing is a terribly solitary activity.

So if domestic violence flies with a geek audience, what could they possibly find offensive? Well you've got to remember that women get upset about domestic violence because it targets them. Similarly geeks get defensive about anything that targets young, middle-class, white males working (or intending to work) with technology. Of course geeks tend to take things a further than that and you can, in fact, expect them to get extremely indignant about anything that fails to further the interests of their caste at the expense of others.

While it is considered entirely acceptable in the geek community for Eric S. Raymond to explain the lack of African Americans and Chicanos in IT (and, strangely enough, in the neopagan movement) by claiming that those people just don't value education, it is completely unacceptable to suggest (even in jest) that the field needs more ethnic diversity. Of course, it's perfectly acceptable to demand more women in IT, but only for dating purposes.

There are many more points of dogma in the geek world than this, and you must agree with them if you wish to keep your audience. Here's a short list:

  1. Intellectual property is bad unless it's licensed under the GPL in which case it is sacred and the copyright must be defended at all costs.
  2. Hackers don't break into computers, use the term cracker. I know it's hard to ignore the irony of a culture dedicated to white male privilege using "cracker" as a term of derision, but do your best to resist.
  3. Government intervention in the free market is evil and useless unless they're intervening to break up Microsoft.
  4. Programmers are truly elite. They are smarter, more insightful and more valuable to society than members of any other occupation. They are also capable of giving the definitive answer to any question on any topic thanks to google.

But there's more to understanding your audience than just knowing their biases, you must also know how to speak to them on their own level. With geeks that means appreciating their inability to distinguish satire, in which prevalent follies are ridiculed and denounced, from the mere bitter scoffs of sarcasm. While geeks admire a bitter scoff as much as the next man, the idea that serious points can be made indirectly is anathema to them. They are simply too literal minded.

This is due to a vicious circle effect. To work well with computers, you must have the ability to break a task into thousands of tiny steps ordered with exact logic. There are no layers of meaning in source code, everything does what it says it does. Everything must be taken at face value. Unfortunately, this abnormal form of communication becomes a default for geeks. Their long work hours and habit of only associating with other geeks causes them to forget how normal people communicate. The ability to be literal gets reinforced at every turn while the subtleties of everyday language are forgotten.

The preferred forms of geek fiction (Sci-Fi and Fantasy) exacerbate this problem since they are plot driven rather than character driven. Fantasy villains are just plain evil and exist to introduce conflict with the heroes (who are just plain good). The kind of sympathetic portrayal of evil present in classics such as Milton's Paradise Lost is unheard of. Even the most ambitious of Sci-Fi authors like Kurt Vonnegut and Harlan Ellison are mere fantasists. They describe scenarios, not people. Is it any wonder then that your typical geek cannot handle any written communication more complex than a pearl script?

For the humorist seeking to target a geek audience, this inability to grasp subtle nuances seems to indicate that you can't target satire to a geek audience. You can, you just need to blatantly advertise that it is, in fact, satire. We'll examine how to do this later on.

The final thing you must remember about geeks is that they are tremendously insecure. This makes sense after all as only a deeply wounded individual rejects conventional society and turns to computers for comfort. Unfortunately this limits the risks you can take as a satirist. If you make the geeks feel even moderately uncomfortable they will not continue reading to see what conclusions you reach but will instead over-react. No chiding of geeks, however gentle or well-intentioned is permitted. Unless you want your site to be on the receiving end of a DDoS attack, you will only validate the geeks feelings of self worth.

Communicating with your audience.

The first thing to remember is that praising the geeks is actually more important than being funny. As long as you are generally positive, your audience will not hold you to consistently high standards of quality. If you are downright sycophantish, you can even get away with consistently low quality.

An excellent example of this effect at work can be found at UserFriendly.org. UserFriendly is a wildly popular geek oriented comic strip that manages to combine painfully bad drawing with being painfully unfunny. The secret of User Friendly's success is the constant unix references and assumptions of geek superiority. Illiad's incessant ass kissing of the Lunix community even allows him to get away with recycling 15 year old jokes and outright plagiarism. Not bad for a guy who uses windows to create his comics.

Once you've established a generally pro-geek tone, the next step is to advertise the comic nature of your content. There are several accepted methods of doing this and you should use all of them to make your point clear. Using "A Modest Proposal" as your title is the classic approach and should make the nature of your work clear to 27.6% of the readers. An additional 38.4% can be reached by wrapping the entire text in html style <SARCASM></SARCASM> tags. By placing a notice that the work is intended as satire at the beginning and end you can bring the grand total up to 75.3%. That still leaves 24.7% of your readers missing the joke and possibly becoming irate, but you can't please all of the people all of the time.

The final step is to carefully proofread your text and remove any content that challenges established geek dogma. Congratulations, your satire is now fit for publication on the World Wide Web. Of course, you may still have questions about the tips I have provided, so I've included a sample text to help illustrate the process.

Original Text:

Microsoft Previews WindowsVD

Redmond -- Hot on the heels of the launch of WindowsXP, Microsoft has just unveiled its plans for the next generation of Windows: Microsoft WindowsVD. "WindowsVD represents a strategic leveraging of our synergistic win-win paradigms" announced a cheery spokes-woman, "it will truly enable web platform peer to peer productizing of eyeballs using XML." The assembled press stood silent for several minutes while attempting to translate her words into English until Microsoft's Group Vice President for Platforms, Jim Allchin, intervened.

"Microsoft WindowsVD will be the most successful version of Windows ever!" exclaimed Allchin. "WindowsVD represents the culmination of our .NET initiative, it will be the first version of Microsoft Windows distributed entirely over the internet. With WindowsVD we have finally begun to leverage our two greatest assets: clueless users and email virii! The world is about to learn the true meaning of the term 'viral marketing.'" The rest of Allchin's speech was drowned out by wild cheering from the assembled crowd of Microsoft Employees, but the available brochures give a fairly clear picture.

Microsoft WindowsVD aims to achieve a 100% upgrade rate in its first month by installing itself though .vbs worms that exploit holes in Outlook and Outlook express. IDG analyst Dr. Rajeev Papshigali was very impressed with the strategy: "The folks at Microsoft really have out done themselves this time. Not only will WindowsVD automatically install itself and then deduct the purchase price from your bank account, but it also exploits a previously undocumented feature of the Pentium4 that destroys your CPU if you try to remove it. Anyone who doesn't run out and buy Microsoft stock right now is a fool."

Predictably, Microsoft's announcement was met with a storm of protest from security professionals and Linux developers. "They won't get away with this!" vowed Alan Cox, "We'll reverse engineer every line of code if we have to and we'll find a way to remove this from P4 boxen. In the meantime I'm recommending that everyone buy an Athlon."

Microsoft CTO Craig Mundie responded by calling Alan Cox a "Commie traitor" and vowing to have the FBI arrest him. When informed that Cox is British, he responded "then we'll use Scotland Yard and MI5. We've got 40 billion in cash for Christ's sake, it doesn't matter if he's in Patagonia." Mundi then laughed maniacally for several minutes while stroking a white Persian cat.

At the risk of sounding like a luddite, this reporter is going to avoid clicking any email attachments accompanied by the text "I send you this operating system to have your advice."

At first glance, this seems like exactly the sort of thing a geek audience is looking for. It bashes Microsoft, it calls Windows users clueless and it glorifies Alan Cox and AMD. Unfortunately it's not quite good enough. If posted in this form, it would generate a stream of responses along the lines of either "heh, I can't believe their [sic] actually doing this. Microsuck is so dumm [sic]." or "I can't find any trace of this on the Microsoft web-site. I think you made this up. Where's your journalistic integrity?" To avoid responses like this, a little extra work is required.

Final Version:

<SARCASM>

The following article is satire and is not meant to be taken seriously. The author is not liable for damages resulting from investment decisions made based on the content of this article. IT IS A JOKE, PEOPLE!!

Microsoft Previews WindowsVD

Redmond -- Hot on the heels of the launch of WindowsXP WHICH IS BUGGY AND CRASHES A LOT! LOL!!, Microsoft has just unveiled its plans for the next generation of Windows: Microsoft WindowsVD. "WindowsVD represents a strategic leveraging of our synergistic win-win paradigms" announced a cheery spokeswoman, HAHA, MARKETING TYPES ARE SO DUMB, NOT SMART LIKE SYSADMINS, ROTFL!! "it will truly enable web platform peer to peer productizing of eyeballs using XML." The assembled press stood silent for several minutes while attempting to translate her words into English untill Microsoft's Group Vice President for Platforms, Jim Allchin, intervened.

"Microsoft WindowsVD will be the most successful version of Windows ever!" exclaimed Allchin. "WindowsVD represents the culmination of our .NET initiative, it will be the first version of Microsoft Windows distributed entirely over the internet. With WindowsVD we have finally begun to leverage our two greatest assets: clueless users and email virii! AREN'T WINDOWS LUSERS STUPID? NOT SMART LIKE LINUX USERS! ROTFLOL!! The world is about to learn the true meaning of the term 'viral marketing.'" The rest of Allchin's speech was drowned out by wild cheering from the assembled crowd of Microsoft Employees, but the available brochures give a fairly clear picture.

Microsoft WindowsVD aims to acheive a 100% upgrade rate in its first month by installing itself though .vbs worms that exploit holes in Outlook and Outlook express. IDG analyst Dr. Rajeev Papshigali HAHA, I BET HE WORKS AT A KWIKEE MART! was very impressed with the strategy: "The folks at Microsoft really have outdone themselves this time. Not only will WindowsVD automatically install itself and then deduct the purchase price from your bank account, but it also exploits a previously undocumented feature of the Pentium4 that destroys your CPU if you try to remove it. Anyone who doesn't run out and buy Microsoft stock right now is a fool."
Don't forget: it's just a joke, so don't get mad!
-- Peter Johnson   

Predicatably, Microsoft's announcement was met with a storm of protest from security professionals and Linux developers. "They won't get away with this!" vowed Alan Cox, "We'll reverse engineer every line of code if we have to and we'll find a way to remove this from P4 boxen. In the meantime I'm recommending that everyone buy an Athlon."

Microsoft CTO Craig Mundie responded by calling Alan Cox a "commie traitor" and vowing to have the FBI arrest him. When informed that Cox is British, he responded "then we'll use Scotland Yard and MI5. We've got 40 billion in cash for Christ's sake, it doesn't matter if he's in Patagonia." Mundi then laughed maniacally for several minutes while stroking a white persian cat.

At the risk of sounding like a luddite, this reporter is going to avoid clicking any email attatchments accompanied by the text "I send you this operating system to have your advice."

The preceeding article was satire and was not meant to be taken seriously. The author is not liable for damages resulting from investment decisions made based on the content of this article. IT IS A JOKE, PEOPLE!!

</SARCASM>

There, that's the kind of article a geek can appreciate.

       
Tweet

Other important things (4.00 / 2) (#4)
by fluffy grue on Fri Feb 1st, 2002 at 12:41:41 PM PST
Remember to put in plenty of meaningful links which only serve to endear yourself to the people reading the article.
--
meep

Ironically Yours (2.00 / 1) (#13)
by doofus on Sat Feb 2nd, 2002 at 08:44:39 AM PST
Another technique to make one's post more "ironic" or to give the illusion of being "in on the joke" is to have "ironic" links in the post, for example:

Perl or Linux

This guy does that all the time - he's obviously trying too hard.


 
I'm confused (2.33 / 3) (#5)
by gcsb on Fri Feb 1st, 2002 at 12:58:46 PM PST
I read both versions of your WindowsVD article but I am still at a bit of a loss. When is Microsoft going to begin upgrading people? Is there any news on a fix for the bug in the Pentium 4 yet?

Having just upgraded to WindowsXP, I don't really want another upgrade just yet.

I hope you can shed some light on these matters for me.

Regards,
gcsb.


Sig is under re-construction...do not panic.

 
Not just g**ks, I am afraid. (4.00 / 4) (#6)
by tkatchev on Fri Feb 1st, 2002 at 01:02:08 PM PST
The problem is much deeper than that, I'm afraid. Mostly, this is a problem of massive illiteracy -- when reading is only a tool for parsing ICQ output, and the closest thing to literature is "manga" about plastic women, the term "stylistic device" loses all meaning.

Most people nowadays have a hard enough time reading simple prepubescent emails, and you want them to enjoy language for language's sake? I think it is unreal.


--
Peace and much love...




 
Cool article, dude (2.66 / 3) (#7)
by Anonymous Reader on Fri Feb 1st, 2002 at 02:39:16 PM PST
Thought the final version was SO FUNNY. I emailed it to all the Java programmers at work and they got it after 10 minutes.

Hey, this is a really funny site but can you put a big <SARCASM></SARCASM> tag around your whole site. It took me many months to work it out. :)


 
MicrosoftVD == Vinerial Disease! (5.00 / 1) (#8)
by error27 on Fri Feb 1st, 2002 at 04:19:22 PM PST
Hah Hah! Microsoft is so stupid.


 
hahaha (1.50 / 2) (#9)
by PotatoError on Fri Feb 1st, 2002 at 05:55:39 PM PST
you think geeks have it bad. You should see some of the "comedies" on TV that supposedly normal people watch.
<<JUMP! POGO POGO POGO BOUNCE! POGO POGO POGO>>

I don't watch TV (3.00 / 2) (#10)
by Peter Johnson on Fri Feb 1st, 2002 at 07:14:41 PM PST
It gives me a headache.
--Peter
Are you adequate?

yeaaaay! (2.00 / 1) (#14)
by PotatoError on Sat Feb 2nd, 2002 at 01:39:26 PM PST
Ill drink to that!
<<JUMP! POGO POGO POGO BOUNCE! POGO POGO POGO>>

 
same here (none / 0) (#38)
by Anonymous Reader on Tue Feb 5th, 2002 at 05:16:21 PM PST
Actually, my TV broke, and I never felt a need to replace it as I have much better movies and TV-series on my computer.


 
Linking Error (1.00 / 1) (#12)
by Anonymous Reader on Sat Feb 2nd, 2002 at 12:11:37 AM PST
I noticed at the beginning of your article you erroneously labelled a link to the cult known as The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints as The Truth. Here is the correct site.


 
speaking of science fiction and fantasy (1.00 / 1) (#15)
by Anonymous Reader on Sat Feb 2nd, 2002 at 08:13:33 PM PST
speaking of science fiction and fantasy,
have you seen what philipm is upto, shoeboy



that's not philipm (2.00 / 1) (#16)
by Anonymous Reader on Sun Feb 3rd, 2002 at 03:55:26 AM PST
philipm is a denizen of rec.boats.cruising.


 
Why Microsoft and AOL should be shutdown and the C (2.66 / 3) (#17)
by Anonymous Reader on Sun Feb 3rd, 2002 at 04:29:46 AM PST
As we all know, AOL and Microsoft are "The Internet" and therefore responsible for its misuse. These two companies released a technology that the world was not ready for, and were unable to control. This would be like Canada developing nuclear weapons, and then allowing terrorists like Osama Bin Laden to take the technology and build bombs for his own use. The US would come down hard on Canada or any country that allowed this to happen. How is this any different than what Microsoft and AOL did? They developed an amazing system, but then allowed Illegal ISP's to take this technology and give it to cyber-terrorists (Hackers). This cannot be allowed to go on any longer. We must take action now and set precedence. I am herby calling for the immediate disbanding of AOL and Microsoft. Plus I feel that the two CEO's need to be sentenced to death and the senior staff should face life in prison. This in wake of 9/11 is the only descent thing to do, in memory of all those who lost their lives to terrorist. Remember there is no difference between terrorists and those that allow them to operate.



You forgot to Tag your post (none / 0) (#26)
by Anonymous Reader on Mon Feb 4th, 2002 at 06:11:23 AM PST
Try

<PsychoticRant></PsychoticRant>


 
Listen you retarded monkey... (none / 0) (#89)
by Anonymous Reader on Wed Feb 13th, 2002 at 01:56:00 AM PST
...It was mostly Canadian scientists who helped the US design the A *AND* H bombs.

Not to mention that we dispose of your old unstable bombs.

As to "comming down hard" on Canada, well I guess the NY state just doesn't need electricity and California just doesn't need water and you just don't need your telecommunications.


 
oh man (1.00 / 3) (#18)
by Anonymous Reader on Sun Feb 3rd, 2002 at 02:08:17 PM PST
<b>Government intervention in the free market is evil and useless unless they're intervening to break up Microsoft.</b>

<p>WRONG. Currently many are petitioning the government to once again step up to the plate. They want the government to begin enforcing open standards again. The only thing they can look forward to is the non-consumer based (in other words no shitty webpages like Adequacy.org) <a href= http://www.internet2.org>Internet2</a>


what? (none / 0) (#24)
by Anonymous Reader on Mon Feb 4th, 2002 at 04:50:17 AM PST
please explain.


 
Still not good enough. (3.00 / 2) (#19)
by walwyn on Mon Feb 4th, 2002 at 02:17:57 AM PST
You have forgot to add the smiley. Every one knows that emoticons are obligatory when imparting humour. The careful readers amongst you will notice that as this comment contains no emoticons, no humour is intended.


so... (none / 0) (#37)
by Anonymous Reader on Tue Feb 5th, 2002 at 05:13:42 PM PST
You're basically saying that "Without a smiley a geek can't understand that something is funny."?


Basically (none / 0) (#45)
by walwyn on Wed Feb 6th, 2002 at 05:39:51 AM PST
There are exceptions but the vast majority are unable to decide whether to laugh or cry, without the appropriate emoticon to guide their reaction.

Much like the guy standing in front of a TV studio audiences holding up the placards "LAUGH", "CHEER", emoticons fullfil the same role for geeks. They just can't be relied upon to understand the emotional content of a message.


 
I'm Sorry (1.00 / 2) (#20)
by Anonymous Reader on Mon Feb 4th, 2002 at 03:32:59 AM PST
This site seems to be hopeless... I've never seen so much prejudice and "boxing up" of people in any other place before... "Geeks" or "nerds" are not a group of people, all the same, with pencil holders, ironed shirts and huge black glasses... The engineer with 2 kids and a wife down the street might be a geek, as well as the raver with all the tattoos who's a friend of your son... There is no "cult" of geeks... We are not all the same. And yes, I DO count myself as a geek since my computer interest is rather great... Laugh about jokes about domestic violence? hmm... wouldn't know about that since I don't believe I've ever heard any... Anyway, if this is how grown-ups write article, I'll stay a youth forever. About the last article, the one supposed to be a joke... I don't believe I know a single person over 14 years of age who would actually find it funny, and I know a lot of geeks. For real geek-humor, go to Dilbert homepage for example...


New here? (4.00 / 1) (#21)
by RobotSlave on Mon Feb 4th, 2002 at 04:07:28 AM PST
Look, we've been over this before.

Sure, you geeks are all different. So very different. Each more different than the last. And yet none of you seem to have figured out how it is that the rest of us know you're all geeks.

Think about it a bit, OK?

PS-- Dilbert? Dilbert? Jesus. I think you just confirmed everything Mr. Johnson was trying to say. But his point clearly escaped you completely, you stupid geek.


© 2002, RobotSlave. You may not reproduce this material, in whole or in part, without written permission of the owner.

Dilbert. (3.00 / 1) (#25)
by tkatchev on Mon Feb 4th, 2002 at 04:51:46 AM PST
I don't know about the humour value of "Dilbert", but it is very useful as a management manual.

Seriously, even though the tone is invariably tongue-in-cheek, most of the ideas in "Dilbert"[1] are meant to be taken quite seriously.

[1] Word of warning: I've never read the "Dilbert" comic strip. I'm only familiar with the thick "Dilbert" books, the ones that have more text than pictures in them.


--
Peace and much love...




 
Excuse me? (none / 0) (#31)
by Anonymous Reader on Tue Feb 5th, 2002 at 04:13:50 PM PST
Calling me stupid first thing you do? Did a five-year old write this?


You must be (none / 0) (#32)
by Robert Reginald Rodriguez on Tue Feb 5th, 2002 at 04:25:48 PM PST
You completely missed the point of the article. What did you want us to think you were? A genius?

Also, calling you stupid was the last thing he did, not the first. Try to be more attentive in the future.


I did? *looks around* (none / 0) (#34)
by Anonymous Reader on Tue Feb 5th, 2002 at 05:00:20 PM PST
I was referring to the fact that he called me stupid in his first response in a thread. Usually when someone expresses an opinion and is met by a short response which finishes of with "you stupid geek" it quite naturally feels like a childish response especially if it's the first time you have talked to the person in question.

The point of the article is, IMHO, that geeks should be regarded as people who will lie down on the floor and laugh at anyone who's not a sysadmin or uses microsoft products. That in itself is quite laughable. What kind of people do you think we are? People who laugh at other people just cause they don't have the kind of talent and/or training in/for computer skills that we have? No geek uses microsoft products? No geek is a common user?


twit (none / 0) (#80)
by Anonymous Reader on Fri Feb 8th, 2002 at 10:56:22 AM PST
the first thing you did was write "this site is hopeless". How is that any better than calling you an idiot? The last thing you did was refer to Dilbert as representative of both geeks and funny; as if all geeks liked Dilbert or had no sense of humor. Get it? You statement *supports* the so-called hopeless article you pretended to criticize.

If geeks understood irony, the irony would be described as "rich".


 
Not really fair... (2.00 / 1) (#22)
by redalert on Mon Feb 4th, 2002 at 04:15:51 AM PST
To begin with your theory doesn't explain the popularity of The Onion amongst the geek crowd.

On the other hand geeks do get terribly confused by ambiguity, which is ironic because the Jargon File seems to think that they have a "Fascination with form-vs.-content jokes, paradoxes, and humor having to do with confusion of metalevels".

- redalert


This is funny... (4.00 / 1) (#23)
by walwyn on Mon Feb 4th, 2002 at 04:31:41 AM PST
Why then do you suppose that anyone who links to the Onion also adds the rider "This is Funny", "A humourous article", "Another gem". Obviously geeks cannot be relied upon to work it out themselves.



"This is funny..." (none / 0) (#30)
by donkpunch on Mon Feb 4th, 2002 at 01:23:22 PM PST
Where The Onion is concerned, I view the rider "This is Funny" in much the same way I view the rider "This is not spam."


 
they are conditioned (none / 0) (#48)
by Anonymous Reader on Thu Feb 7th, 2002 at 02:41:07 AM PST
The fact that the Onion is so well known has the effect of a set of implicit sarcasm tags around the whole thing.


 
This may explain geeks' strange spirituality (5.00 / 1) (#27)
by Adam Rightmann on Mon Feb 4th, 2002 at 08:19:58 AM PST
Many geeks seem to gravitate towards odd paganistic religions, suhc as Wiccanism, agnoisticism or atheism. It may be because they have trouble understanding ambiguity, metaphors and simile. When a priest talks about the parable of the mustard seed, they think I'm not a botanist and tune out the message. There may be a need here for parables rewritten in geek terms, perhaps the parable of the kernel tossed onto a Powermac, or an i386 system, or a Motorola Mac.


A. Rightmann

A couple of questions (none / 0) (#36)
by Anonymous Reader on Tue Feb 5th, 2002 at 05:11:35 PM PST
Why is atheism an "odd, paganistic religion"? It's not paganistic because it's not a religion. It's not even odd, it's quite common. And why do we have trouble understanding ambiguity, metaphors and so on? Don't group people you don't know anything about. You seem to have a very isolated view on the world, IMHO.


 
It's not that. It's just that religion is BS. (1.00 / 1) (#88)
by Anonymous Reader on Wed Feb 13th, 2002 at 01:50:23 AM PST



How open-minded and tolerant of you. (none / 0) (#90)
by hauntedattics on Wed Feb 13th, 2002 at 06:47:30 AM PST
n/t


 
*Ahem* (none / 0) (#91)
by M0nkee on Tue Mar 5th, 2002 at 08:52:18 PM PST
I happen to be one said "geek"...I was just confirmed on Sunday. SO before you guys go riding on your high-and-mighty (and very, very sheltered) horses, please note that the statement about all said "geeks" being adnostic, buddhist, wiccan, and etc. etc. I suggest you get your facts straight.

And please note I am very, very literate. How many people can say they've read "War and Peace" (most boring book in the world, but it was for my english teacher) all the way through? Not many, considering most people don't make it past chapter 5-6.


 
plagiarism claim (none / 0) (#28)
by Anonymous Reader on Mon Feb 4th, 2002 at 08:30:17 AM PST
uhm, i need a little more proof than
a link to the cartoon,, like a link to someone
saying 'this is plagiraism' and proving it,
or a link to the cartoon it was plagiraized
from?



check for yourself (none / 0) (#29)
by Peter Johnson on Mon Feb 4th, 2002 at 09:51:46 AM PST
It's directly lifted from the Unix Hater's Handbook.
--Peter
Are you adequate?

 
hmm... (none / 0) (#33)
by Anonymous Reader on Tue Feb 5th, 2002 at 04:50:07 PM PST
Only a minor intellect could possibly come up with "The Unix Hater's Handbook". The text isn't funny, except in the manner that it's funny that someone would write something like that and think that people with an IQ over 70 would find it at all amusing. Calling a geek stupid is generally not a very accurate perception. Most of the people I know that I feel belong to our geekhood are considerably more intelligent than the average man. Many of them are university students (and teachers), engineers, technicians and programmers. These are not usually the kind of people commonly referred to as stupid. Humor has to be a bit more intricate than the lowlevel humor described in the bottom article to amuse us. Even if someone who is not computer literate can read the text and understand absolutely nothing, it's still a lowlevel humor text, seemingly written by a child of 12-14 years of age. I just hope a real geek didn't write it, because it really insults our intelligence. Dilbert was not really what I was thinking of, but at the moment it was the only place I could remember the website for (I was tired). Here are some other links: PVP, MegaTokyo, Penny Arcade for example, at least for comics. Some of the articles here on Adequacy are incredibly amusing, for example the "Is Your Son A Computer Hacker?" article... We spent a whole afternoon laughing at that one... So did the computer institution teachers at the university... Lets get one thing straight... A "Geek" is not the 14-yearold kid next door who got a computer for christmas and is now referring to himself as "Morpheus", "Satan_666", or something... A geek is someone who knows exactly what components are in his computer, who put it together himself from parts and who has tried a Unix-system at least once... We know what's possible and not possible to do with a computer... You can hack a stereo to steal music just as much as you can hack a toaster to steal bread for example... Don't laugh at this, someone on this site seriously proclaimed that it was possible to break into their stereo and steal music digitally... That's all for now... Generate something a bit more intricate this time... Not just "You read Dilbert? You must be stupid!"...


How about (none / 0) (#39)
by hauntedattics on Tue Feb 5th, 2002 at 05:29:18 PM PST
less insults to the 'average man' and more whitespace next time? Then we'll consider your supposed intelligence, dear.



[Expletive deleted] (none / 0) (#40)
by hauntedattics on Tue Feb 5th, 2002 at 05:31:02 PM PST
Fewer, fewer, fewer! Milles pardons...



 
Average man... hmm... (none / 0) (#41)
by Anonymous Reader on Tue Feb 5th, 2002 at 06:23:10 PM PST
I wasn't asking for any consideration on MY intelligence. You seem to regard "geeks" as people who can hack into a bank but can't tie their shoelaces. The truth is the people with a real interest for "geekish" subjects such as computers, electronics and so on usually become so called "Engineers" of one type or another. You may have heard of these people. They're the people who make your phone, computer and Internet connection work. These people ARE usually more intelligent than the average man.


Uh. (none / 0) (#43)
by tkatchev on Wed Feb 6th, 2002 at 01:49:22 AM PST
Fact is, g**ks do not run anything. Just because you are a low-wage server monkey doesn't mean you are responsible for anything.

Don't delude yourself, you are just an indentured servant that the higher-ups of this world use to attain their own means. But don't let that stop you from believing in your own exceptionalness! A happy slave is a productive slave.


--
Peace and much love...




You dont know (none / 0) (#49)
by Anonymous Reader on Thu Feb 7th, 2002 at 04:43:06 AM PST
You don't know anything about me actually, but still you chose to speak your mind about me being a low-wage "server monkey". I'm a student, studying to become a computer engineer, a profession with anything other than low-wages. The entry level is about 2000$ a month here, and in your country about 3000$. After a few years you can make as much as 5-6000$ a month. this is not exactly peanuts. Engineering is a profession that requires intelligence, just to get through the education, or you will never get your degree. What's this slave business? In your definition it seems everyone who has a boss are slaves. Then everyone in the US are slaves to the police? Or the government? or the army? Think you have to be a bit clearer in your ranting.

/anonymous


Depends on your point of view (none / 0) (#59)
by dmg on Thu Feb 7th, 2002 at 11:29:50 AM PST
you can make as much as 5-6000$ a month. this is not exactly peanuts.

Not to you maybe. Some of us know how much lawyers, dentists, doctors and other TRUE professionals make.

time to give a Newtonian demonstration - of a bullet, its mass and its acceleration.
-- MC Hawking

Check it out (none / 0) (#60)
by Anonymous Reader on Thu Feb 7th, 2002 at 03:16:43 PM PST
That's what an experienced computer engineer with good education makes. And yes, we are just as professional as any lawyer, doctor or whatever. We know a LOT about something you hardly know anything about, just as the situation would be with a lawyer or a doctor.




 
Wow, you are so smart! (none / 0) (#42)
by tkatchev on Wed Feb 6th, 2002 at 01:46:06 AM PST
Quoth:

We spent a whole afternoon laughing at that one...

You are very easy to amuse, are you not? I bet you also laugh at retarded children and kick puppies for amusement.


--
Peace and much love...




Its humor (none / 0) (#50)
by Anonymous Reader on Thu Feb 7th, 2002 at 04:46:55 AM PST
It's fun to read things that someone, who knows nothing at all about the subject, has written. To comment on it is about like kicking a puppy, sure, but by that you declare that the author is a puppy. Puppies shouldn't speak their mind about the complicated human world, which they do not know anything about. Did you also think laughing at him was like laughing at someone retarded? Think you should take this up with him rather than me.

/anonymous


 
g**ks are minor technicians, nothing more (none / 0) (#47)
by Anonymous Reader on Thu Feb 7th, 2002 at 02:33:56 AM PST
Only a minor intellect could possibly come up with "The Unix Hater's Handbook".

Regardless of its questionable humor value, it was written by people that know far much about computing than your run-of-the-mill "geek" (ugh, I said the g-word). They have a valid argument. A Lisp machine was a much better platform than any Unix workstation.

Most of the people I know that I feel belong to our geekhood are considerably more intelligent than the average man.

If we are to judge your by your own g**k standards, oh, yeah, god, why am I even talking to you, I should just bow. However, I'd rather judge you by the standards of people who have less at stake on the issue (like, e.g., your sense of self-worth).

Let's put it simply. G**ks are at best no brighter than anybody else. They simply know a lot of computer trivia; for they are utterly ignorant about anything beyond the actual science of computation (it is only the rare g**k that can correctly state, say, the semantics of the simply typed lambda calculus).

And they think themselves geniuses for their petty accomplishments. This is the central component to being a g**k.

Many of them are university students (and teachers), engineers, technicians and programmers. These are not usually the kind of people commonly referred to as stupid.

I'm sorry, but programmers as a rule *are* stupid. Have you read any code recently? Have you noticed that Pearl is a popular language?

Humor has to be a bit more intricate than the lowlevel humor described in the bottom article to amuse us. [...] I just hope a real geek didn't write it, because it really insults our intelligence.

Your "intelligence" deserves to be insulted, given that it is not there. You are not some sort of fucking deep thinker because you can code, you're a mere technician.

Here are some other links: PVP, MegaTokyo, Penny Arcade for example, at least for comics.

If you are into comics, I recommend Linux Zealot.


Answer (none / 0) (#51)
by Anonymous Reader on Thu Feb 7th, 2002 at 05:02:46 AM PST
Regardless of its questionable humor value, it was written by people that know far much about computing than your run-of-the-mill "geek" (ugh, I said the g-word). They have a valid argument. A Lisp machine was a much better platform than any Unix workstation.

A geek knows a lot more about computers than you seem to think. visit www.lisp.org for info about what Lisp is. Lisp is a programming language. Comparing a programming language to an operating system is like comparing apples with oranges.

If we are to judge your by your own g**k standards, oh, yeah, god, why am I even talking to you, I should just bow. However, I'd rather judge you by the standards of people who have less at stake on the issue (like, e.g., your sense of self-worth).

Let's put it simply. G**ks are at best no brighter than anybody else. They simply know a lot of computer trivia; for they are utterly ignorant about anything beyond the actual science of computation (it is only the rare g**k that can correctly state, say, the semantics of the simply typed lambda calculus).

And they think themselves geniuses for their petty accomplishments. This is the central component to being a g**k.


Calculus is also a science, just like computing. Math is a central subject if you want to educate yourself to become an engineer, which is usually what any geek over the age of 25 is. My sense of self-worth is at least not as large as your sene of prejudice for people you know nothing about.

I'm sorry, but programmers as a rule *are* stupid. Have you read any code recently? Have you noticed that Pearl is a popular language?

First thing, it's spelled Perl. Second of all, Perl is not a programming language, but a scripting language. It's a good language though, although I believe myself that PHP is better. It's also Open Source, btw. I have read code recently, as i program myself. Besides, for my university courses I have to write simple and more complicated programs. Since you don't seem to be a programmer (you would know this stuff) you really don't know what you're talking about. Get a clue.

Your "intelligence" deserves to be insulted, given that it is not there. You are not some sort of fucking deep thinker because you can code, you're a mere technician.

I didn't say I was a deep thinker, you just claimed that. I'm not a technician, I am an engineer. I don't like your repeated use of the word f**k. Could you please use civilised language?

If you are into comics, I recommend Linux Zealot.

It's poorly drawn, hardly any plot, cheap jokes (hardly even jokes at all). Noone with more than two braincells would read it, not to mention draw it.

/anonymous


You are a fucking retard. (none / 0) (#56)
by tkatchev on Thu Feb 7th, 2002 at 07:24:12 AM PST
God, I feel defiled.

A self-styled "g**k" has no clue what a Lisp machine is!

Good God, at least you could have tried to read ESR's "jargon file" if you think you are somehow a technical "wizard".

Look up some info on the Lisp machine at www.google.com. Or is typing "lisp.com" into your browser the extent of your knowledge about Lisp? How utterly sad. I'm losing all respect for the g**k subculture. (Not that I had much of it in the first place, though.)




--
Peace and much love...




It's too old for me (none / 0) (#62)
by Anonymous Reader on Thu Feb 7th, 2002 at 03:29:36 PM PST
As a not so old geek, I don't seem to spend my time in the museum enough for you. Lisp Machines may have been interesting in the past, but we do our programming in C/C++, Java and PHP depending on application. (No, I know PHP is a scripting language, I just put it there for completion). Nowadays, they only seem to be available as "Lisp on a Chip" for a slot in a macintosh. I may be wrong, I don't know anything about Lisp, except that it is a programming language. It's not really a language that I feel like learning since it's so old. Like learning Fortran for fun.

/anonymous


Re: (none / 0) (#65)
by tkatchev on Fri Feb 8th, 2002 at 02:02:22 AM PST
Lisp is one of the most progressive programming languages in the world.

If you want to talk about the Fortranization of programming, you can't fail to mention C. (Or C++. What a horrible monstrosity; like a bicycle with air conditioning.)

Frankly, I don't see why I am wasting my time here. I don't want to talk with a self-styled g**k who can't code his way out of a paper bag.

Get lost, OK? If I get the urge for juvenile discussion, I'll call for you. Meanwhile, start learning.


--
Peace and much love...




Indeed. (none / 0) (#69)
by derek3000 on Fri Feb 8th, 2002 at 05:36:39 AM PST
Show a typical C/C++ coder some stuff written in Lisp (or Eiffel, for that matter) and they won't have a clue as to what's going on. To think that he actually implied that it was primitive...




----------------
"Feel me when I bring it!" --Gay Jamie

Eiffel. (none / 0) (#70)
by tkatchev on Fri Feb 8th, 2002 at 06:40:51 AM PST
Never much cared for Eiffel.

Programming in it seems more like a masochism exercise more than anything. Good as a willpower exercise, I guess...


--
Peace and much love...




Just because (none / 0) (#72)
by Anonymous Reader on Fri Feb 8th, 2002 at 09:31:03 AM PST
Just because you don't understand something written in a certain programming language when you've never programmed in it (or seen any code written in it) doesn't imply that you never could understand it. Btw, someone on this page said that all programmers are stupid. Think you have a bone to pick with him. If it wasn't you that is. Lisp IS old and not very practical for the kind of programming we do. Eiffel is newer and more interesting, just as smalltalk or haskel, but still not very interesting for the kind of programming we do. Every school has their own little favorite languages. Chalmers, here in Sweden, uses Haskel. From what I know, Lisp is a favorite of MIT. It may be that Lisp is more popular in the US?

/anonymous


Re: (none / 0) (#76)
by tkatchev on Fri Feb 8th, 2002 at 10:47:54 AM PST
...programming we do...

Look, you personally couldn't code your way out of a paper bag. Your comment about "smalltalk and haskell" shows the depths of your ignorance -- the two languages have nothing in common.

For a start, one of them is advertised as a "purely functional" languages. (I've never personally programmed in Haskell. I really hate syntactic sugar.)

Lisp isn't "popular" because it was invented in the U.S. -- it is popular because it is very useful for AI and lightweight scripting. Just because your knowledge of programming doesn't extend any further than Perl/CGI and Borland Builder, doesn't mean that languages you've never heard of are "useless".

In any case, if I had my way I would immediately nullify the diplomas of CS "graduates" who cannot program in Lisp. I believe proficiency in Lisp is essential if you are aspiring to be anything more than a dirty webmonkey.


--
Peace and much love...




 
Absolutely! (none / 0) (#84)
by fzr on Mon Feb 11th, 2002 at 11:04:51 AM PST
Lisp is a thing of beauty - it mirrors a recursive, set-theoretic approach to computability, and thus can be used to do some fantastic stuff, though perhaps it's not the most practical language ever.

Look for Chaitin's stunningly (deceptively) simple Lisp proofs of Godel Incompleteness. Marvellous!


 
mathematics (none / 0) (#57)
by Anonymous Reader on Thu Feb 7th, 2002 at 09:22:46 AM PST
Applied math is essential to engineering. Pure math is essential to understanding applied math.

A technician engineer/programmer can:
  • Integrate a function using a variety of techniques, without actually understanding how they work.
  • Program and compute stuff, without knowledge of concepts central to computing, such as formal logic.
  • Ramble on about computability and the halting problem, without ever even attempting to understand a proof of it.


  • A technician uses tools without understanding them. He/she probably has no need to understand them, and lacks the time or inclination to pursue them.

    I certainly don't think this makes the technician any less of a human being.

    Many in theoretical physics use the tools of mathematics in this way, without grasping even the methodology used to obtain these tools. And these people are, in my book, technicians as well.

    I don't expect anyone in any technical field to derive every tool they use from first principles, merely to look at these tools on a deeper level and appreciate their origins. If you don't do this, even if you know the tools themselves intimately and functionally, you are still "only" a technician.


    Actually (none / 0) (#61)
    by Anonymous Reader on Thu Feb 7th, 2002 at 03:22:14 PM PST
    Our math was built from the ground up. We went through the most basic concepts first and went forward from there. Formal logic IS part of our education and a quite central one at that. A technician or a programmer is quite different from what the title engineer implies. Technician or programmer implies high school level education, while engineer is university level education. My copy of Adams Calculus is in my bookshelf, and it is a wellread copy at that. You have to read it thoroughly to pass the courses in math. I know exactly what an integral is and what it's used for in mathematics.

    /anonymous


    Yeah, right. (none / 0) (#64)
    by Anonymous Reader on Fri Feb 8th, 2002 at 01:00:11 AM PST
    Our math was built from the ground up. We went through the most basic concepts first and went forward from there.

    ... Formal logic IS part of our education and a quite central one at that. A technician or a programmer is quite different from what the title engineer implies. Technician or programmer implies high school level education, while engineer is university level education.

    Engineers don't study formal logic. Philosophers do, CS PhDs do. Certainly not engineers.

    My copy of Adams Calculus is in my bookshelf, and it is a wellread copy at that. You have to read it thoroughly to pass the courses in math.

    If your concept of "logic" or "mathematics" is "stuff I did in Calculus", then you have just proven the point.

    I know exactly what an integral is and what it's used for in mathematics.

    No, you don't know what an integral is. You know how to perform a certain mathematical procedure, and a set of practical situations in which it is useful.


    In reality, (none / 0) (#71)
    by tkatchev on Fri Feb 8th, 2002 at 06:52:48 AM PST
    Who needs to know functional analysis?

    Personally, I consider anybody who understands what an intergral "really" is to be functionally insane.

    Certainly I make a point to forget things like that as soon as physically possible.


    --
    Peace and much love...




    gibber gibber gibber!? (none / 0) (#77)
    by fzr on Fri Feb 8th, 2002 at 10:48:28 AM PST
    what an intergral "really" is

    Isn't it just the inverse of a differential?

    tee hee!


     
    We do (none / 0) (#74)
    by Anonymous Reader on Fri Feb 8th, 2002 at 09:41:21 AM PST
    Actually, we have a whole course where we learn logic. It's called, you guessed it, "Logic". Maybe your CS PhDs are on the level of our CS Bachelor Degrees, I don't know, but we DO study formal logic. I can't tell you all the terms though, since we study it in swedish and I don't know the correct translations.

    You yourself try to describe all the math you learned over 4 years in five minutes. Do you think you would even remember all of it?

    Yes, I STILL know what an integral is. We don't learn procedures. We learn the theory first, use those theories to perform calculations illustrated by certain problems and then learn shortcuts to make the calculations take a more reasonable amount of time. Like you don't use shortcuts to derive? You only use the definition and work from there? Sounds unbelievable in that case.

    Feel like reading our course description in swedish? here you go: http://www.ingvet.kau.se/~anders/

    /anonymous


    Here's a hint: (none / 0) (#78)
    by tkatchev on Fri Feb 8th, 2002 at 10:51:30 AM PST
    The course you call "logic" isn't formal logic.

    I doubt you could even understand a course in formal logic.

    P.S. I sincerely doubt that you study functional analysis before calculus I, like your comment would imply.


    --
    Peace and much love...




     
    then perhaps you could help me (none / 0) (#83)
    by fzr on Mon Feb 11th, 2002 at 05:52:12 AM PST
    Could you explain the Axiom of Choice? I always found it very difficult to interpret, particulary in relation to the Generalized Continuum Hypothesis.


    Axiom of choice (none / 0) (#85)
    by Anonymous Reader on Mon Feb 11th, 2002 at 11:46:27 AM PST
    I think the axoim of choice has to do with assuming that, given an infinite set of people using big words to make themselves look smart, there exists a function which, when evaluated, will make at least one of them shut the fuck up until they know what they're talking about.

    This is only of theoretical interest, since in the real world it is obvious that no such function exists, since people like you are still talking.


    there's a big difference (none / 0) (#86)
    by fzr on Tue Feb 12th, 2002 at 03:27:41 AM PST
    I was asking a question about a subject about which I know a little, find interesting and would like to know more.

    Given the previous thread, I thought somebody might be able to educate me. My motive was not to look smart - if it were would I admit my own lack of understanding?

    Your response suggests you too may know a little of the subject, though perhaps you would prefer an "interesting" "debate" about operating systems as so many here seem to.


     
    so, (none / 0) (#66)
    by Anonymous Reader on Fri Feb 8th, 2002 at 02:39:12 AM PST
    Have you studied number theory, Peano arithmetic, ZFC, groups/rings etc...?

    Thought not.


    Actually (none / 0) (#73)
    by Anonymous Reader on Fri Feb 8th, 2002 at 09:33:35 AM PST
    Yes, but I didn't find it interesting, and so it didn't stick. If I found it all that interesting I would probably have become a Mathematics Engineer.

    /anonymous


    good point (none / 0) (#75)
    by Anonymous Reader on Fri Feb 8th, 2002 at 10:40:16 AM PST
    If ever there was a subject which was easy to forget over time, mathematics would be it.

    Personally, even the interesting stuff leaks out of my brain if I don't use it, though some of the bigger concepts stick.


     
    "Mathematical Engineering"? (none / 0) (#79)
    by tkatchev on Fri Feb 8th, 2002 at 10:54:01 AM PST
    What is that?

    (Not a flame, just genuinely interested.)


    --
    Peace and much love...




     
    Geeks (none / 0) (#35)
    by Anonymous Reader on Tue Feb 5th, 2002 at 05:03:20 PM PST
    Define geek.


    OK (none / 0) (#44)
    by fzr on Wed Feb 6th, 2002 at 05:17:36 AM PST
    I think of geeks as the kind of petty minded jobsworth who is the scourge of any profession, certainly not limited to computing.

    They concentrate on minutae, and are hence unable to observe the bigger picture (or understand certain forms of humour).

    They probably know so much about their chosen field, be that unix administration, stock control or whatever, that they percieve themselves as superior to almost everone else at their place of work. They think that place would cease to function without them.

    They view with contempt anyone who does not treat them as the omnipotent gods they believe themselves to be.

    And most sadly of all, they lack the intuition, inspiration and ambission to achieve anything on the level of some of the more traditional "geeks" such as Bill Gates.


    And you... (none / 0) (#46)
    by budlite on Wed Feb 6th, 2002 at 01:26:50 PM PST
    ..lack basic spelling skills.


    well so do you, here, here, and here (none / 0) (#53)
    by fzr on Thu Feb 7th, 2002 at 05:17:18 AM PST
    Actually no, I'm not pedantic enough to find any of your spelling mistakes.

    I assume that you make them from time to time, and I forgive you.


     
    Sorry (none / 0) (#52)
    by Anonymous Reader on Thu Feb 7th, 2002 at 05:08:11 AM PST
    I'm sorry this is the view you have of geeks. People with no knowledge to back up what they say are called lamers in the computer society. They are hardly regarded as geeks, as they know a lot less than they think they know. The true geeks are those who know exactly what knowledge they have about the various subjects of computing. Ambition is common, surely, but work is required, not just shouting "I'm a 1337 Ha><0R, r3sp3c7 m3!". Intuition and inspiration are needed to make any usable programs. Ambition is, as said, pretty common, I'll give you that one. <br>
    /anonymous


    what? (none / 0) (#54)
    by fzr on Thu Feb 7th, 2002 at 05:47:06 AM PST
    People with no knowledge to back up what they say are called lamers... true geeks are those who know exactly what knowledge they have about the various subjects of computing

    Erm, like I said, but without the computing bit? Geeks are the ones with the knowledge, regard themselves as superior to anyone without, and fail to grasp the fact that an encyclopedic knowledge of small details is not a measure of worth.

    Intuition and inspiration are needed to make any usable programs

    True. But that does not necessarily come from the geek who implements it.

    Do you think geek is a compliment?


    Do you think geek is a compliment? (none / 0) (#55)
    by Anonymous Reader on Thu Feb 7th, 2002 at 07:15:50 AM PST
    G**k is a compliment when it comes from another g**k, and an insult when it comes from someone who is not. It's similar to a man calling another man a b***h (ok) versus a man calling a woman a b***h. Or a black man calling another black man a n****r, versus a white man calling a black man a n****r. One is a term of endearment, the other is racism.


    damn right bitch. (none / 0) (#58)
    by Anonymous Reader on Thu Feb 7th, 2002 at 09:30:13 AM PST
    Did that endear me to you?


    How's my bitch this morning? (none / 0) (#67)
    by Anonymous Reader on Fri Feb 8th, 2002 at 03:30:05 AM PST
    Did that endear me to you?

    I dunno. Are you one of my friends, or are you a complete stranger? Swearing at strangers is very odd, but swearing among friends is divine.

    Withnail and I contains the finest term of endearment in cinema history.


     
    Maybe (none / 0) (#63)
    by Anonymous Reader on Thu Feb 7th, 2002 at 03:33:42 PM PST
    Maybe that's how you regard it, but I take it as a compliment, even though I dont associate it with the narrow minds you seem to think geeks are. All my friends (geeks) have just as many sides as any other person, and do have other interests. So do all the rest of the geek community except some weirdo here and there.


     
    Geeks are obviously idiots because (none / 0) (#68)
    by CommunistPartyAnimal on Fri Feb 8th, 2002 at 04:14:44 AM PST
    if they really had their shit together they should easily be able to conquer the world. Just think a bunch of engineers fucking with George Jr's comms Bwahahahardy har har.

    Pollatishuns Rulez Da Werld doodz


     
    Hi, were you offended? I was offended. (1.00 / 1) (#82)
    by Anonymous Reader on Sat Feb 9th, 2002 at 03:16:46 AM PST
    Yah.

    Ok, let me set something straight.

    I am a college grad. I am also a geek. I am also a strong supporter of Open Source technology. I am fluent in three languages. Much more than that if you count the programming lingos I know; I don't.

    I am also an atheist. I think that most people who've read most of the old religious texts (Bible, Torrah, Qur'an, Vishnu) are as well, or have been way too indoctrinated to let reson take hold over beliefs.

    Now humor, I get. Most of us geeky people do. I realize that this article is supposed to be funny. Hell, I come to adequacy.org to laugh. It doesn't really matter whether you guys are serious or not, I'm afraid. You have no journalistic integrity whatsoever.

    If an article is serious, I simply laugh at how misinformed you people are, and I laugh even harder at those who support the article, knowing full well that they are ignorant of the world around them.

    If an article is meant as satire, which I'm under the impression that they ALL are, I laugh at it for what it is. And once again, I laugh even harder at those agreeing with it as it is indeed satire and they're agreeing totally with something meant not to be taken seriously.

    There's my two cents. You don't like it, bitch to the admin and have it removed.


     
    Actually, it served a purpose for me. (none / 0) (#92)
    by Anonymous Reader on Fri Mar 29th, 2002 at 03:36:06 AM PST
    This article was what I put up after, on mIRC, the whole channel I frequent was up in arms absolutely agast at the "Is your son a computer hacker?" article. They were amazed at its stupidity (the hacker article, not this) and didn't even consider it might be a joke until someone pasted someone's comment which was basically, "Uhh. This is clearly a good joke, people" into the channel. Then I had poked my head in and noted how it's under the heading of "internet idocity" and then pasted the link to this article. I felt it was rather well placed. ;)

    I think the reason it's hard to tell these are jokes are because the internet is so vast. There's so many people who actually <b>mean</b> this stuff! It's hard to tell what is a joke and what is not, and most "geeks" as they're regarded in this have really heard it all.

    By far the funniest thing about this, however, isn't the fact that this is a joke but rather that it's a joke about people not getting the joke... and then people treat it like it is not a joke. ^^; I will agree with one man who posted on here, not nearly as funny as the article that scored over 4000 comments, "Is your son a computer hacker?" but still has a point. Bah, geeks get so uptight. *Goes off to play D&D and insists that she's cooler than anime fans that call anime japanamation like the geek heirarchy says*


     

    All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective companies. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest ® 2001, 2002, 2003 Adequacy.org. The Adequacy.org name, logo, symbol, and taglines "News for Grown-Ups", "Most Controversial Site on the Internet", "Linux Zealot", and "He just loves Open Source Software", and the RGB color value: D7D7D7 are trademarks of Adequacy.org. No part of this site may be republished or reproduced in whatever form without prior written permission by Adequacy.org and, if and when applicable, prior written permission by the contributing author(s), artist(s), or user(s). Any inquiries are directed to legal@adequacy.org.